WHAT NOW?: MUSEUM TECHNOLOGY POST-PANDEMIC

Technology Tuesdays | Jaime Meier

---

This winter, my roommates and I have been kept very warm, at times much TOO warm, by the radiators in our apartment. The design of this intense heating system was to combat a previous pandemic – the Spanish Influenza in 1918. Radiators were created to be so hot that occupants would open their windows to maintain a livable temperature, which would also allow fresh air to circulate through homes, schools, and workplaces. There is no doubt that CoVID-19 will have a similar impact on museum infrastructure which will affect interpretation and engagement technology.

3D-printed replicas of stone spear points. | Source

One of the greatest opportunities for new technology in museums is through ensuring there is not a backslide in sensory museology, primarily through touch and hands-on experiences, while implementing important health and safety measures. Tactile objects may still be utilized as 3D printed replicas because the plastic is easily sanitized, and the object can easily be replaced after significant wear. It is also important to keep in mind possible barriers for blind people who rely on touch for reading and interpreting information. One of the most simple and cost-efficient solutions is raised drawing boards that allow for an easily embossed and readable handout. 

With museums and their exhibitions moving online, ideally there would be a continuation in forms of remote museum learning. In addition to exhibitions and educational programming available online, a possible accompaniment would be travelling outreach kits that would be available to not only teachers, but also other organizations and groups that promote learning and play. While this form of engagement is on hold for now, as the pandemic retreats it will likely become a popular option to fulfill educational desires and maintain the health of users.

Example of a museum mobile app. | Source

A final key in maintaining engagement is museums taking advantage of their mobile apps. The level of usability for museum apps fluctuates from institution to institution, with some museums charging for their content and others offering little more than a few audio guides or a map. A mobile app provides the opportunity for personal engagement via built-in tours and programming within museums as well as opportunities for learning outside of the museum. However, there are still accessibility issues with this form of engagement, as not everyone is able to own a mobile device or a mobile device with the required operating system. 

One of the highlights for me when visiting museums is experiencing new or exciting interpretation strategies. I am looking forward to the day when I am able to return to museums and for the technological innovations that will be implemented. What form of museum engagement are you hoping to see when museums open again?

REPLICATING TO UNDERSTAND? A STANFORD UNIVERSITY APPROACH TO THE MUSEUM OBJECT

OBJECT OF THE WEEK

BY: ELEANOR HOWELL-CHRISTENSEN

Reproducing a priceless (or at least very valuable) museological object is usually synonymous with the term forgery. Reproducing for money is a time-old practice that's plagued the museological community for centuries: think of the Cerne Abbas Giant or the Holly Oak Pendant.  Yet a class at Stanford University is actually encouraging its students to reproduce historical objects, not to gain money but to gain more understanding.

'Things that you learn by doing are lessons that last for a lifetime,' says lecturer Kristen Haring, who teaches the Objects of History class at Stanford. Students replicate historical objects and then interact with them, allowing them to get a literally hands-on approach to the historical eras they're studying. The course uses a combination of modern approaches (think 3D printing) and traditional approaches (think potter's wheel) to explore various objects from the Stanford Collection.

The idea isn't completely new - I remember writing on papyrus in grade school to get a feel for Egyptian Hieroglyphics - but the Stanford course takes the concept to new heights. So what do you think? A fun way to engage with history, or a waste of time?

Check out the video here:

THREE WAYS THAT MUSEUMS CAN USE 3D SCANNING TECHNOLOGY

TECHNOLOGY TUESDAYS

BY: NATANIA SHERMAN

In the past, Musings has explored the dark side of 3D printing, such as the ability to 3D print weaponry. We've also looked at self-generated 3D selfies. However, today I'd like to look at how 3D printing and scanning technology can have an impact on museum practice. While the technology is still being developed and improved, many museums have started using this technology to find creative ways to facilitate educational and conservation related goals. Without further ado, here's a short list of some 3D projects that have special implications for museums:

A screen cap of  an object from the Smithsonian X 3D  project (source)

1.The Smithsonian X 3D is a project that uses 3D capture methods to create 3D data as a way of documenting objects . The purpose of this project is to use the data so that museum educators and conservators can access information about the physical object without having to handle or even possess the object itself. the data can further be used for future 3D printing, or to compare current and past states of the same object for conservation purposes. Because only a small percentage of the Smithsonian's collection is ever seen by the public, this technology could also allow more people to see what the Smithsonian has in storage.

A rendering from CIMS work on a historic property in Nova Scotia (source)

2.The Carleton Immersive Media Studio (CIMS) at Carleton University creates 3D scans of heritage buildings in order record their current states, and facilitate restorations projects. This work has the potential to be immensely useful for Museums and heritage organizations as it could allow them to capture all kinds of data relating to objects and buildings.

A screenshot of 3D renderings created through crowd-sourced images (source)

3.Project Mosul is a crowd-sourced initiative by Reikrei to preserve data relating to cultural objects that are threatened by natural disasters or human intervention. Project Mosul specifically collects data related to objects from the Mosul Cultural Museum in Iraq that were destroyed by Daesh, sometimes also known as ISIS. The project has the support of the Iraqi Ministry of Tourism and Culture and is significant because it is preserving information about some of the earliest known evidence of human civilization which rests in some of the most vulnerable places in the world.

I hope this short list can highlight some of the ways that embracing 3D scanning and printing technology is changing the way that museums and organizations can disseminate and preserve knowledge about cultural heritage objects. This is just a small highlight of what can be done as use of this technology becomes more accessible and mainstream.

THE DARKER SIDE OF 3D PRINTING

OBJECT OF THE WEEK

BY: ROWENA MCGOWAN

Before I get into the meat of this post, there is something that I want to make absolutely clear: Semaphore has never made a functional gun. Semaphore will never make a functional gun, unless it is legal and in full cooperation with the police.

Now that’s over with – man, is 3D printing the coolest thing ever or what?

3D printing is just what it sounds like – printing 3-dimensional objects. An object is built up through the laying down of thousands of thin layers. It’s most commonly done in plastic but objects can also be printed in nylon, metal and other materials. It’s a wild new frontier in manufacturing. It’s even been suggested that 3D printing could overthrow the current capitalist system by putting the means of production in the hands of ordinary people.

We made it, guys! It's the future! Source.

It sounds wonderfully utopian in theory. Who wouldn’t want to print their own toys, their own clothes, even their own food? But what happens when a less desirable pattern becomes available?

That question jumped to the forefront of many people’s minds on May 5, 2013, when Cody Wilson released his pattern for a 3D printed gun, which he named the Liberator. I wouldn’t call it a panic exactly but people began to ask questions about what 3D printing was really capable of. There are currently no regulations on 3D printer ownership and use. And, unlike a traditional gun, the Liberator can be printed completely out of plastic, making it undetectable using traditional methods.

The Liberator in the process of being printed. Photo credit: Daniel Southwick.

I’ll be the first to admit that the idea of anyone being able to print a gun at any time is pretty scary. But how much of that fear is just hype? Is it actually possible to just download the pattern and go?

The iSchool’s own Semaphore, a research cluster dedicated to investigating emergent technologies and society’s relationship with them, decided to wrestle with that question. A team consisting of Dr. Matt Ratto, Isaac Record, ginger coons and Daniel Southwick attempted to print the Liberator.

The original plan was to print a fully functional gun and see just how easy it was to create such a thing. But, unfortunately for the team (although perhaps fortunately for us!), gun control laws in Canada are pretty strict. The team did attempt to partner with the police but things just didn’t work out in the timeframe they had.

So, they altered the pattern, to make sure that their gun didn’t actually function. The gun they eventually came up with had several parts reoriented, a plug glued into the slot for the firing pin and was printed in clear resin, a far more delicate material than called for in the pattern. It took 17 hours to print the full gun.

Showing off some of the Liberator's alterations. Photo credit: Daniel Southwick.

Can anyone print a gun now? The team concluded that, theoretically, yes. But in practice, no.

3D printers are not cheap, especially 3D printers which are good enough to make large and complex prints. And 3D printing does in fact require skill. It took four people who study 3D printing three days to get the gun printed and together. And even if they hadn’t altered the final product, the team doesn’t consider the gun to be particularly dangerous. As Dr. Ratto pointed out, you could kill someone with it. . . if they were only three feet away.

The Liberator, before assembly. Photo credit: Daniel Southwick.

Does that mean that we never have to worry about 3D printed weapons? Of course not. 3D printing is advancing in leaps and bounds. Someday, it probably will be that easy to print a gun (or a sword or a bomb). And that means we’ll have to grapple with these big questions of control. How do you keep someone from printing a gun? The simplest answer is to ban or regulate 3D printers. But is that really the route we want to go? 3D printing has the potential to be dangerous but it also has the potential to be amazing. Let’s take the time to really think about how society should and will adapt to 3D printing, before we panic and outlaw something that could literally revolutionize our world.

The team with the fully assembled Liberator. From left: Matt Ratto, Isaac Record, Daniel Southwick and ginger coons. Source.

Works Consulted:

Record, I., Southwick, D., coons, g., & Ratto, M. (2014). Regulating the Liberator: Prospects for government regulation of 3D printing. Journal of Peer Production.

Giovannetti, J. (2013, July 2). U of T team's DIY handgun tests the potential of 3-d printing. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/u-of-t-teams-diy-handgun-tests-the-potential-of-3-d-printing/article12943852/


Special thanks to Daniel Southwick and Dr. Matt Ratto, two men I would trust with a 3D printer any day of the week.


If you would like to experience the wonders of 3D printing for yourself, Semaphore holds an open Critical Making Lab almost every Friday from 9:30 - 11:30. I can personally attest that everyone in the lab is knowledgeable, patient and willing to answer endless questions.

LET ME TAKE A 3D SELFIE: SKANECT AND SOCIAL MUSEOLOGY

TECHNOLOGY TUESDAYS

BY: ORVIS STARKWEATHER

Me being scanned using the Skanect software. Photo Credit: Roger Orvis

If you’d asked me a couple years back about who could create a 3D scan, I would have thought that only a handful of individuals or organizations could have afforded the technology. But last year I encountered Skanect, which since its release in January 2013 has allowed people use a XBox Kinect sensor to create 3D models. Since Skanect is free for non-commercial use and the sensors themselves retail for around $110 new with many cheaper used versions on the market, the technology is surprisingly economical. Additionally, the Toronto Public Library’s three Digital Innovation Hubs have 3D scanners, making the technology even more attainable to residents of the city.

Bust of a Female Deity captured by David Neff as part of the Met MakerBot Hackathon. Source.

Thingiverse is a platform where many models are shared mostly with the intention that they will be 3D printed. Many people within the community, however, attach personal stories to the objects and give background information on why they were made or scanned. These objects can exist side by side with art contained in galleries such as this Bust of a Female Deity from the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

I confess that my scan is technically not a selfie; I enlisted my mom’s help to capture my shape. But when dreaming up a title for this piece, I wanted to emphasize the role of the self in user generated scans. These scans are a way to document and connect to material culture across vast geographies. The ability of publics to share the stories invested in objects offers possibilities for fostering social museological approaches.

Screenshot of the finished 3D model of me. Photo Credit: Orvis Starkweather.

The elimination of gatekeepers allows different sorts of collections to be built. Digitized facsimiles allow items that are not museum collection quality to have a public life. Museums have traditionally been selective in which types of bodies are included in their content, but self-scanning expands who is allowed to be represented and how. Additionally, scattered content creation locations can disrupt notions of the superiority of the center over periphery regions.

When encountering an exhibition, I often ask myself “Who does this museum serve? Who is excluded? Where does the balance of power lie between the creators of an exhibition and the source communities represented?” While certainly not a panacea to such complex issues, self-generated 3-D scans are one tool out of many that can be used to chip away unequal systems. They also come with their own set of limitations which should be carefully considered and complicated. Technologies, even affordable ones, always establish boundaries over who can access them.